Armed, random violence in schools, universities, workplaces and other public venues is one of the most horrifying and vexing problems facing the United States. Recently, a mentally disturbed former student was responsible for killing young schoolchildren at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., which has prompted considerable discussion about how to prevent such attacks in the future. These attacks, however, are disturbingly frequent—with recent incidents at schools in Oakland, Calif., Toulouse, France, Jacksonville, Fla., Chardon, Ohio, Omaha, Nebr., Madison, Ala., Winnenden, Germany, Kauhajoki, Finland, DeKalb, Ill., Blacksburg, Va., and many other places.
Offices, other workplaces, malls, movie theaters, public facilities and even places of worship have also been the location of significant gun violence. Examples include recent incidents in Portland, Oreg., Aurora, Colo., Minneapolis, Minn., Brookfield, Wis., Tucson, Ariz., Norcross, Ga., Columbus, Ohio, and many other places. The tragic loss of human life and sorrow caused to survivors of each of these incidents is incalculable.
There is also good reason to believe that these crimes will continue. Instances of armed violence in schools and workplaces have increased over the past ten years with no sign of abating.
While many agree that these crimes can be prevented, a wide variety of structural reasons have made prevention difficult. Attempts to curb access to firearms have been successfully resisted for many years through both legal challenges to gun control laws and through political channels. Placing armed guards in schools and workplaces is both impractical and probably ineffective against a determined, well-armed foe with little or no interest in surviving the incident. Arming teachers or office workers inexperienced with firearms or public safety may only increase the number of gun-discharge accidents and, paradoxically, provide guns to those who end up using them for further criminal violence. Attempts to incarcerate or hospitalize the mentally disturbed may violate legal rights and due process standards.
Technical approaches to the problem are also possible but so far have met with little success or acceptance. For example, it is possible to construct doors and windows out of armored or bullet-resistant materials, but the cost and inconvenience of installing or retrofitting such materials are generally too great for most schools and workplaces. (Even if the installation of fortified doors and windows were economically feasible, it is likely that teachers, parents, students and office workers would resist this measure, as the doors are heavy, not easily opened or closed and turn an otherwise open and inviting school or office environment into something resembling a prison or military installation.)
It is also possible to construct common office and classroom furniture pieces with armored, bullet-resistant panels—such as a desk or lecture podium with an armored panel. These types of furniture pieces, however, provide little or no protection against a well-armed opponent willing to shoot any available target within a classroom or office space. Further, these furniture pieces only provide limited protection to those individuals who are able to get to and hide or position themselves behind the piece of furniture. These furniture pieces do not restrict an intruder from entering the room, thereby allowing the intruder to walk up to the individuals hiding behind the furniture piece and shooting from a position where protection is no longer afforded. Even if the furniture piece were able to protect the few who were fortunate to take cover behind it, the remaining persons in the room would be completely unprotected and vulnerable.
What is needed, instead, is a relatively inexpensive, unobtrusive and yet easily deployed device for securing a room, such as a classroom or office space, against a determined, perhaps well-armed foe. It is desirable that the device should fit into the normal environment of a classroom or office such that its appearance in the room does not alarm the room's occupants. Preferably, the device should also be able to function as a normal piece of furniture. These and other objects are embodied in the invention described and claimed below.